Philip D. Hartsough v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• agreeing with the district court that the decision to try to recruit counsel can and should be informed by the realities of recruiting counsel in the district
• agreeing with the district court that the decision to try to recruit counsel can and should be informed by the realities of recruiting counsel in the district
• agreeing with the district court that the decision to try to recruit counsel can and should be informed by the realities of recruiting counsel in the district
• acknowledging “difficult mix of factors weighing for and No. 23-2946 7 against recruiting counsel”
• acknowledging “difficult mix of factors weighing for and No. 23-2946 7 against recruiting counsel”
• “Nothing in Pruitt or our other cases on recruiting counsel prohibits a judge from using available information and the judge’s experience to assess the importance and potential merits of the case and to assign priority accordingly.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).